Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
От | Iavor Raytchev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas |
Дата | |
Msg-id | HKEIIDPFPDBMOMDLIEEGGEIACOAA.iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas (terry <tg5027@citlink.net>) |
Список | pgsql-interfaces |
Iavor and terry: > >> Correct. Was lazy to look it up. Does this change something? > > Not really, I was just following up on the discussion about the > incorrect use of the term Relations by MS Access. I don't think that > Relationships is a bad tab label - except that it's a bit > long for the > current size tabs :). > > Access's Relationships are all placed on one canvas, regardless of > whether or not there are several independent diagrams > present. If this > model is to be used by pgaccess, it would make just as much sense to > put 'Relationships' into the Database menu instead of a tab, > since the > New, Open, and Design actions would not mean anything. > > the-$0.02-of-an-old-Access-developer-wishing-the-best-to-pgaccess ... There are no tabs anymore. The new interface is... you should download and see it. Also - there was the idea to rename 'Schema' to 'Diagrams' as there can be many such - snapshots of different parts of the database. Useful when one has to write a documentation (I did this once). And then - a 'visual referential integrity manager' (a future feature) that will allow referential integrity to be viewed/created/edited in a visual manner. So - for the native speakers - there is an option the 'Visual referential integrity manager' to be called 'Relationships'. Any native comments? Iavor
В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления: